Takeoff with a problem?

On 2004-01-19 08:36:16 -0800, (Rocky) said:

This is a loaded question and I suspect most will adamently say they
would not! However, it isn't too hard to come up with a number of
scenarios in which a pilot would take off with known "legal" problems
that are not affecting safety of flight, and some which are mechanical
problems that do affect safe flight in a very personal manner.

It's a known fact that most squawks are found on the homebound leg of the
flight.

--
Larry Fransson
Seattle, WA

Larry Fransson wrote in message news:2004011916485016807%lfransson@comcastnet...
On 2004-01-19 08:36:16 -0800, (Rocky) said:

This is a loaded question and I suspect most will adamently say they
would not! However, it isn't too hard to come up with a number of
scenarios in which a pilot would take off with known "legal" problems
that are not affecting safety of flight, and some which are mechanical
problems that do affect safe flight in a very personal manner.

It's a known fact that most squawks are found on the homebound leg of the
flight.

Hi Larry
Is that because when the squawk is found they head back to base? gg
I'm talking about actually taking off with a known problem whether its
headed for home or someplace else. Sometimes it could be driven by
emergencies such as the threat of getting killed if you stick around,
or someone who needs desperate medical attention, or ........?
Having seen your posts over time I hope to see your positive input
from known incidents in the NW. I flew helicopters based out of
Napavine WA and did spray operations in WA, OR, ID from there as well
as fixed wing spay ops out of Moses Lake.
Cheers
Flyinrock aka Ol Shy & Bashful

On 2004-01-20 07:14:45 -0800, (Rocky) said:

It's a known fact that most squawks are found on the homebound leg of
the
flight.

Is that because when the squawk is found they head back to base? gg
I'm talking about actually taking off with a known problem whether its
headed for home or someplace else.

I don't have a problem flying with inoperative equipment that is deferred
in accordance with the minimum equipment list, as long as it isn't
something I actually need for the flight. I also generally live by the
rule that I don't have to fly anywhere at any time just because someone
said, "Go." If it doesn't work and I need it, I'm not leaving home. If
I'm away from home, I might note it acting up a bit on the outbound leg,
and I'll confirm it on the return leg and write it up when I get home.

Sometimes, a real, live deficiency pops up on the outbound leg. Then it
doesn't matter what the situation is. I call home and they find another
way to finish the trip. I once spent a night at the Stikine Inn (paper
thin walls, and lots of hot heat that you can't turn down - woo hoo!) in
Wrangell, Alaska when we noted on arrival that the standby attitude
indicator was dead. We had just descended through a couple thousand feet
of icy clouds, causing our nurses to ask, "How much ice is too much?" My
answer: "More than that." (The airplane was a Citation II, which has
pneumatic deice boots on the wings, so they were able to watch the ice
collecting.) It was a major inconvenience and the patient had to wait
another two hours or so, but there was no way I was flying home that way.
I could just see us climbing out and having another attitude indicator
fail. In the clouds, in the dark, is not where I want to be when I'm
trying to figure out which of two remaining attitude indicators (one
electric, one air-driven) is wrong. There's really no such thing as
partial panel flying for me anymore. That standby AI is the tie-breaker
(and it's required). They sent another airplane to complete the trip. The
next day, we got a ferry permit to fly home in VFR conditions.
Fortunately, it was relatively clear, which can be somewhat uncommon in
that part of the country.

--
Larry Fransson
Seattle, WA

Larry Fransson wrote in message news:2004012015065216807%lfransson@comcastnet...
On 2004-01-20 07:14:45 -0800, (Rocky) said:

It's a known fact that most squawks are found on the homebound leg of
the
flight.

Is that because when the squawk is found they head back to base? gg
I'm talking about actually taking off with a known problem whether its
headed for home or someplace else.

I don't have a problem flying with inoperative equipment that is deferred
in accordance with the minimum equipment list, as long as it isn't
something I actually need for the flight. I also generally live by the
rule that I don't have to fly anywhere at any time just because someone
said, "Go." If it doesn't work and I need it, I'm not leaving home. If
I'm away from home, I might note it acting up a bit on the outbound leg,
and I'll confirm it on the return leg and write it up when I get home.

Sometimes, a real, live deficiency pops up on the outbound leg. Then it
doesn't matter what the situation is. I call home and they find another
way to finish the trip. I once spent a night at the Stikine Inn (paper
thin walls, and lots of hot heat that you can't turn down - woo hoo!) in
Wrangell, Alaska when we noted on arrival that the standby attitude
indicator was dead. We had just descended through a couple thousand feet
of icy clouds, causing our nurses to ask, "How much ice is too much?" My
answer: "More than that." (The airplane was a Citation II, which has
pneumatic deice boots on the wings, so they were able to watch the ice
collecting.) It was a major inconvenience and the patient had to wait
another two hours or so, but there was no way I was flying home that way.
I could just see us climbing out and having another attitude indicator
fail. In the clouds, in the dark, is not where I want to be when I'm
trying to figure out which of two remaining attitude indicators (one
electric, one air-driven) is wrong. There's really no such thing as
partial panel flying for me anymore. That standby AI is the tie-breaker
(and it's required). They sent another airplane to complete the trip. The
next day, we got a ferry permit to fly home in VFR conditions.
Fortunately, it was relatively clear, which can be somewhat uncommon in
that part of the country.

Larry
For many years I have flown with the idea that I'll risk MY life, but
not YOURS. And further, the most expensive ass in the world is the one
I am sitting on! (I know some will say I am also the biggest one!!)
I know you have a lot of experience so please don't misunderstand me
on this. How many times has an MEL grounded an aircraft for something
simple that has little or no bearing on being able to complete a
flight safely? It seems more and more regulations are being
promulgated for our safety and less and less emphasis on individual
judgement and experience. One of these days we won't be able to go out
of the house without getting permission from someplace and dressed in
a fashion comensurate with the ambient conditions with of course the
extra kit just in case weather turns inclement. THEN we will be faced
with the mode of transport and more
conditions/regulations/restrictions....etc, etc.
In commercial aviation is it presumed that there are more than one
aircraft available to fly out to continue a trip that is interrupted
for some small item that legally grounds or terminates a flight? What
about the flights that originate in a remote area and have no
reasonable back-up? Should they be avoided or prohibited?
Being in dangers way, either by virtue of weather, terrain, political
problems, or mechanical problems, the PIC is the one that makes the
final decision. Maybe I am just a dummy who flies willy-nilly around
the world with little regard for anyone or anything. Seems odd though
that I run into a number of pilots who are out there flying under
difficult conditions with questionable equipment in foreign or remote
areas. Were it not for them and their ability to cope with the
conditions, there would be no aviation in that area. And, if I may
add, aviation would be the loser for not benefiting from their
experience.
Sorry....didn't mean to editorialize or get on a soap box.
If there is any pilot who has not done something that seemed to be a
challenge to either their ability or training, I don't think they are
capable of learning anything new.
Best professional regards
Ol Shy & Bashful

It depends a lot on the purpose of the flight and what the squawk is. The
pilot is the final authority of whether it is safe to fly. He has to suffer
the consequences of a bad decision, both legal and otherwise.